Voice of the Appraiser In-Depth Report

[gregb]

2024 Voice of the Appraiser In-Depth Report | Valuation Review

www.valuationreview.com

 

[CGinMN]

Direct Link

https://www.valuationreview.com/Resource.ashx?sn=n2024_Voice_of_the_Appraiser

 

[Mejappz]

So much for the theory that they can't blame you for something you did not complete.

 

[alebrewer]

So much for the theory that they can't blame you for something you did not complete.

View attachment 93717View attachment 93718

citation, please.

 

[George Hatch]

Screengrab of the state's ruling and the verbiage actually used or it didn't happen. Some of the critics are not above fabricating the story in furtherance of their talking point. We've already seen plenty of appraisers - including some on this forum - conflate the 3rd party PDR with appraisal practice. Even after being shown otherwise.

Being incorrect doesn't count towards being credible.

 

[CGinMN]

Here’s what Peter C says:

Post in thread 'Hybrid'

Jun 12, 2018

Anyone have a case where an appraiser was fined, sanctioned, or sued due to a hybrid appraisal where (a) the inspector concealed facts or misrepresented what existed, (b) the appraiser, who never saw the property, did their level of due diligence as outlined in the SOW, and (c) while not always necessary (depending on how the SOW is written), assuming there is an EA in the report regarding property inspection, that EA was found to be improper?"

Denis, You've loaded that question up with a lot of requirements -- so, no, I have not seen that exact, specific case. But, we have seen...

• Junior Member

• 

 

[Mejappz]

citation, please.

The text is taken directly from the posted report.

 

[Mejappz]

Here’s what Peter C says:

Post in thread 'Hybrid'

Jun 12, 2018

Anyone have a case where an appraiser was fined, sanctioned, or sued due to a hybrid appraisal where (a) the inspector concealed facts or misrepresented what existed, (b) the appraiser, who never saw the property, did their level of due diligence as outlined in the SOW, and (c) while not always necessary (depending on how the SOW is written), assuming there is an EA in the report regarding property inspection, that EA was found to be improper?"

Denis, You've loaded that question up with a lot of requirements -- so, no, I have not seen that exact, specific case. But, we have seen...

• Junior Member

• 

Well, their it is as explained by an attorney who frequently handles these types of cases.

 

[alebrewer]

The text is taken directly from the posted report.

Right - so what member of what state board said that appraisers are responsible for an inspection they didn't perform? I can assure you it wasn't Texas - if it even happened at all.

 

[Mejappz]

Right - so what member of what state board said that appraisers are responsible for an inspection they didn't perform? I can assure you it wasn't Texas - if it even happened at all.

How am I supposed to know that? We've seen cases where appraisers, despite drafting proper scopes of work, end up facing legal action due to faulty third-party inspections. These inspections may have seemed credible at the time but were later found to be inaccurate or erroneous. As a result, the appraisers were held liable for relying on these flawed reports. Given this history, why would anyone assume that a state board wouldn't hold an appraiser accountable for a third-party inspection that turns out to be defective? It's a significant risk for appraisers. I recommend checking out Peter Christensen's blog to read more about these cases.